This is why I hate socialists

Yeah, the individual cuts, after which they will expire and taxes will rise on the middle class, while corporate rates remain cut.

Tax breaks beer and wine.

Guess what, one of the Senator's sons is a beer lobbyist. Like I said, lobbyists had the most influence. It would be ironic if it wasn't so blatantly
offensive.

That hardly constitutes robbery.

It's the very definition of, when you cut corporate rates, create deductions only the wealthy will use, but raise taxes on the middle class and
eliminate their deductions, including student loan interest, teachers, etc. THAT is corporate robbery.

It starts with making your personal being a business. Then any interests you expand on from there on out get filed as shell corporations.

People try to gain wealth by attaching their personal entity of a being to any investment they may make, and it's a mistake. People pay extra taxes
because they work for it, but working for money can be switched to money working for them... business' don't get taxed at the rate citizens get after
write off's.

Tell your friend loopholes are a better strategy, because the greedy and historical choices of these matters show that good people need to use their
tactics to equal the playing field... your friend is an enterprise that means.

Reducing tax rates first starts with investing in one self, and not being in need of 40+ hours locked in a building each and every week to pay a
higher tax rate.

I should rephrase that to I am defending Communism against left/right propaganda, but not advocating for it. but, I don't know if that makes more
sense.

To be honest, 'anarchy' or, in this case, an 'anarchist society' is a uptopic vision, anarchy will never be fully achieved because not everyone will
be an anarchist, there will always be those that build societies, and systems/platforms or attempt to dominate or rule over others, anarchy is more of
a tension than an actual telos.

so, I don't have future visions because my focus is on the immediate and 'living anarchy' and taking an ax to the chains of domination... no one knows
or is able to predict what would happen, or how it "will" work

maybe that sounds like a non-answer, but, my position is not to install platforms/systems etc, but the negation of them

Pick any platform of government wished for, let it go unchecked by the citizens long enough, and tyranny takes hold... this includes democracy.

To me, because capitalism shows to be a quick rise to power (the U.S. being the quickest to dominate in history), but is not capable of escaping the
seeded tyranny aspects, we just need new players.

There's no need to cause bloodshed over it or anything, but forcing all government officials to step aside as we vote in new unconnected members of
tyranny is a solid platform to push towards. Maybe current politicians just need to have an 8 year hiatus before entering back into campaigns under a
system of a no political party platform?

I feel you're spot on... but we just need to remove the tyranny of the players. The system wouldn't have escalated the U.S. to world super power
status so quickly had the base platform not been a foundation to lean on.

Thomas Jefferson said it himself, something to the degree of "let any for of government go unchecked and tyranny will set in", and "a revolt every
10-20 years is a healthy act... to thwart the spread of tyranny." We're just 150 years past the 20 year call for a revolt is all! Great job
voters!

Socialism, in its original form, is a temporary step towards achieving its mission, which is communism. It is not a social construct, as it was not
socially constructed. It's an ideology.

Don't throw around terms you're not familiar with. It just makes you sound funny

Okay. Here you go.

Social constructionism is a general term sometimes applied to theories that emphasize the socially created nature of social life. Of course, in
one sense all sociologists would argue this, so the term can easily become devoid of meaning. More specifically, however, the emphasis on social
constructionism is usually traced back at least to the work of William Isaac Thomas and the Chicago sociologists, as well as the phenomenological
sociologists and philosophers such as Alfred Schutz. Such approaches emphasize the idea that society is actively and creatively produced by human
beings. They portray the world as made or invented—rather than merely given or taken for granted. Social worlds are interpretive nets woven by
individuals and groups.

a social mechanism, phenomenon, or category created and developed by society; a perception of an individual, group, or idea that is 'constructed'
through cultural or social practice

That's from a plain ole dictionary. Get one.

To further clarify. A government has the idea to give all it's citizens health care, equally. They put together a delivery system which does
that, and that delivery system is given a name, put into action, and thusly becomes the 'social construct'.

As far as Karl Marx, I've read his work. You might find this synopsis of his thinking educational. It was actually quite magnificent and brilliant
in many ways, but it became bastardized over time.

originally posted by: MOMof3
You had better get use to it. After the republicans and rich take everything and kill the middle class, we will go full socialism.

Oh brother! (~sigh) I just wish I could wave a magic wand and all the socialists, marxists, anarchists, and communists would be in the middle of a
far-away island somewhere searching for their utopia, and leave the rest of us alone.

Civil war is what the far right wants. Destroying the middle class is one way to get it. When those rural dwellers that put trump and republicans in
power figure it out, they’ll be living in the cities with other welfare recipients.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.